well this is about falsificationism in social theory - and it pretty
much applies to any theory in social science - be it modernization
functionalism underdevelopment etc
in my view a good social theory must at least explain the basic facts
of the present and the recent past (historical realism) and have some
predictive power, or at least give grounds to understand where the
system is heading and what could be the measures and countermeasures.
arguably régulation coupled with long waves enabled the prediction a
Great Recession would strike advanced capitalism (wrote so in 2003-2004
on rekombinant and then in 2007-2008 here) and it actually did. In
general, I've been persuaded since the early 90s neoliberalism would
end like laissez faire in the 1920s - in a deflationary, structural
crisis, the problem of course was when.. i confess i thought the dotcom
crash was it, but eventually the house of cards fell.
so it was (is) a good crisis theory. lemme first point out inflection
points of advanced capitalism in XX-XXI centuries (Mason gets them
wrong, for instance) - basically it is 1890-1913 belle epoque stability
and growth (last spell of European hegemony) - 1917-1929 revolution,
inflationary crisis and early Fordist boom - 1932-1947 Great Depression
and World War - 1950-1973 Keynesian prosperity and Cold War (mature
fordist growth regime) - 1979-2008 Great Moderation and Globalization
(neoliberal growth regime under informationalism) - 2011-201? Great
Recession and Global War (or Reaction vs Revolution).� As it was rightly said, there is no teleology, since in a major crisis
of effective demand it's ideology that counts, ideas about the future:
for instance what should be done to solve the Great Recession by
equalizing income and opportunities. Like in the interwar period a
rabidly reactionary alternative is counterposed to a reformist
alternative. I think anti-oligarchy movements that have been successful
since the start of the crisis have adopted this pragmatic mission of
doing something against escalating inequality. What needs to emerge is
a reformist compact that can rally all diverse components of what used
to be called the left in all regional blocs (in fact, globalization is
leaving ground to regionalism as mode to organize international trade
and politics) - shouldn't we discuss here a synthesis that can gain
acceptance within movements and defeat cryptofascism and nationalism in
Europe, America, Asia?
Ecopopulism probably has a chance to become a viable progressive path
out of the crisis against national populism. Climate and Social Justice
these are twin priorities. A schumpeterian state that redistributes
innovation opportunities in a democratic, transgender polity where
citizens are not disenfranchised by social exclusion could be a way to
go. I have yet to read Benkler's latest, but subsidizing a veritable
not-for-profit sharing economy via basic income could be a way to boost
the non-private/non-public sector and go beyond passivizing and
stigmatizing beveridge-style welfare states, by designing social
transfers to emancipate individuals rather than social categories, by
providing incentives to go beyond fossil capitalism.
Anyway, pace Popper, large-scale social theories give a sense of
historical change and the directions collective agency might take. So
we need them bad, especially now that liberalism (that enemy of grand
theorizing) has lost all its bearings.
Neoliberalism is passé, even the Economist says so. So what comes
next?
best ciaos,
lx
On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 9:42 PM, Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi {AT} gmail.com> wrote:
The problem with global social theories that deal with long time
constants is that they are next to impossible to prove, unless one
has access to parallel universes (even assuming that existence of
correct theory is possible, which may not be true due to the
underlining complexity which at some point may connect to quantum
noise and Heisenberg.)
<...>